Trimming prints a method

I don't know about you but over the years I have found no matter how careful I am setting the printing paper in the easel before exposure, it can still come out wrong. I'm talking about making sure the the picture is parallel to the sides of the paper. It is something we all have to deal with at some point. The problem being you can not tell this until the paper has been processed by which time it is to late.

This means that the paper has to be trimmed true again. To allow for this I have increased the margins around the printed area and even the size of the paper. Which I think is a waste as I would prefer to use the whole sheet to print on. But aesthetically speaking I think the margin around the picture adds to the overall effect and stops finger marks getting on the image. Which leads on to another skill that needs to be mastered, the art of trimming your print parallel. At one time it did not matter what I did I could not get it right, that is until a friend introduced me to the cut edge principle. This is where you use the freshly trimmed edge as your straight edge for the next cut and so on round the print. Wow! what a difference it has made over the years.

The knowledge of this method has helped with the trimming of my FB prints that I stick to a pane of glass so they dry flat - described here in another article. 

Idiot list!

I've been clearing out the closet that I use as a darkroom. Whilst I was moving out some old photographic paper the bottom of one packet opened and on to the floor dropped a clear plastic folder. To my surprise it's my original film processing list; a step by step reminder for the developing process, showing what quantities to mix and how long to develop each of the makes of film. At the time it was Ilford PanF, FP4 and HP5. The developer is the recently reintroduced Paterson Aculux. The only film from the list to stand the test of time is FP4; the only film I use from Ilford regularly and remains my all time favorite.

When starting on your journey to develop your own film it is a good idea to make up an idiot list. It is there in writing to prompt you on what to do next; it is a way of ensuring that the process goes smoothly and that the negatives are properly developed. As you become more proficient you should update your list with the changes you make - ie: film development times, solution quantities etc. I still use one but now it's divided into two. One page shows the developing method needed for each of the developers I use and page two is a prompt for the stop, fix and wash procedure. I know it backwards but old habits die-hard.

So what has changed over the years? The developer for a start. The stop time has increased to two minutes. I no longer check to see if the film has cleared and the milkiness has gone after two and a half minutes when fixing. I had forgotten that I even did this! The wash time is down to fifteen minutes and I do not add fourteen drops of wetting agent - thats way to much!

The results of my first use of PMK Pyro

The results are not faultless. I will come to that later, first I have forgotten to mention that the films being processed are Ilford FP4+, used at ISO 125. 120 format producing a 6x6 negative. Now I'll outline the procedure used.

1. The working solution was made up using filtered tap water at 21 degrees C and poured in straight away.
2. Once the developer was in the tank I agitated it continuously for the first minute.
3. The tank was inverted twice every 20 seconds and tapped to dislodge any bubbles.
4. stopped, fixed and washed as normal.

I did not re-dip the film in the developer after fixing to intensify the staining. This is up to you but I was advised it did not make a noticeable difference.

Whenever I process a film I find that I'm a bit apprehensive as to what the outcome will be, even more so with a new developer! so just before I wash the film I have a little look to see if there is a negative, so far I have not been disappointed.

First impression, once the film was dry I noticed there weren't any water staining marks, that's a bonus. The film base has a slight mauve colour to it which increased in strength slightly with longer development times. The negatives overall were evenly processed. The contact prints revealed that there are dark spots on the neg's which I think may have been caused by air bubbles. I have just processed another film this time I gave it a two-minute pre-soak and there are no black spots on the negs.

To re-cap: Two minute pre-soak, pour developer in and agitate for first minute, then invert tank twice every twenty-seconds, stop,fix and wash as normal. You should get some very very fine grain negs.

I have printed four pictures so far. The first two on Foma 113 variant gloss, F11 grades 2.5 and 3 and they have a cool tone to them. The next two on Ilford multi-grade gloss, F11 grade 2 and 2.5, these have a warmish tone to them. Both papers were developed in Ilford -multi-grade print dev.

The pictures that appear in this post have been scanned from prints and do not convey how well they have printed. These are straight prints with no dodging or burning in. I wanted to show how well the negatives have printed and how evenly they have developed. I will be producing a final print set on FB paper at a later date using a mix of ordinary and warm tone developers.

Will I use Pyro again? Yes! it is likely to become my default film developer. The grain produced by this developer is minut to the point of making it difficult to see when focusing the negative for enlargement. I feel that the twenty-second double inversions of the tank is a bit fraught but I think it will get better the more I get used to it. Without Trevor's advice it may have taken a few more films to get it right. Thanks Trevor!


Other articles from this blog on PMK Pyro

What next?

Agfa test strips.

Working solution

Solution B

After bath

FP4+ development

Adox art 

PMK Pyro raw

Making up PMK Pyro from raw

Adox results

Negative comparison with PMK Pyro

PMK Pyro grain comparison